nice review man, not that I completely agree with it though. The Jonny Frost character was a little uninteresting, i’ll give you that. But I really liked the new interpretations of the other rogues, particulary Croc, I liked how they used him as muscle, I mean what else can he be in a realistic version? They couldn’t just have him like The Lizard from Spiderman could they? And I thought the way they portrayed Batman was brilliant, almost as a ghost or a god. Thats how Batman should be to the villains, a mythical creature.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Thanks for the comment, ace.  For me, I like the more fantasy elements of comics.  I prefer the “comic book” look instead of the more realistic look of the characters.  I guess that’s why I stick with DC and Marvel heroes than other characters in comics today.

Reply to this: comment | thread

“...doesn’t deliver,” eh? well, it washed my socks… with creepiness and blood. i re-read this book twice, and although i found it creepier from the surprises the first time, it grew on me.

Joker is my favorite Batman villain, as well, and i wouldn’t call this a classic or definitive Joker story as i’ve read many good and tepid ones;  i found it more than entertaining, however. it was a quiet revelation of sorts, of layered sins and buried memories, and the “Jonny Frost” character helps bring them to the surface because Joker is almost beyond comprehension and Frost is fairly recognizable.

in a way, it’s a lot like Coppola’s “Apocalypse Now” with its almost sane narrator, giving us the all important point of view of Joker as he returns to upset the balance of crime and craziness in Gotham and attempts to turn all battle zone lines back to himself.

as far as Joker keeping Jonny around as his henchman, reasons were hinted at in the story and can pan out well.

Jonny is a bit crazy, he does the “Stockholm Syndrome” one better by bonding with Joker and protects him. Joker also knows Jonny is deeply afraid of him, but not paralyzed and is able and willing to do Joker’s bidding.

what i found interesting about Azzarello and Bermejo adapting the classic Batman villains is that they all look like natural extensions of their version of Gotham City, so that all worked well for me.

4/5

Reply to this: comment | thread

Thanks for commenting, astronomius. 

I agree that it was definitely creepy, but the characters didn’t move me enough to care.  I’m really enjoying the Joker arc in Batman: Confidential.  Sick and fun at the same time.  Check it out.

Reply to this: comment | thread

I picked up the Joker storyline in the Batman: Confidential series as well and thoroughly adored it. I’m a bit of a heathen to some in that I don’t really fawn over The Killing Joke much at all. It’s a great piece of work but far too short, for my liking. I feel rushed through it, never getting a chance to properly dig into (or be dug into by) the Joker. However, both of those books contain an important element that this Joker title sorely lacks.

I’m fine with this realistic tone of Gotham and its universe - “Nolanising” as it’s now sometimes referred to. I love the gadgets and fantasy stories as well but I don’t feel that the realism inherently lacks anything. It’s the writing of the Joker himself that fails here. What sucks is that he has no special scale. Apart from being more violent than other character’s here, he’s no more larger-than-life than anyone else. Sure, he’s psychotic… But Charles Manson was psychotic too.

You could pretty much restyle the Joker’s face to a regular person’s and edit his name into Alberto Moscone, or some other cliche street thug name, and this would would essentially be exactly the same story. There’s nothing particularly special about him being the Joker here. And that’s a problem.

The Joker needs to be more than a criminal, like all the people around him merely are. The significance of Batman’s major “Rogues Gallery” is that they’re not regular law-breakers. They’re special - with the Joker, arguably, being the most special of all. This guy needs to be epic and grand; not just in his mannerisms and behaviour but in his psychology and incomprehensible strategies. It fits that he can be hideously violent, beyond the scope of what else we might see. That can’t be the only thing that differentiates him from the rest of the underworld though.

I’m not saying I hate this work because I don’t. It certainly has its strengths. Realistic Gotham is valid in theory too, since you can be true to the Joker without needing fantasy. This book just didn’t deliver him. It only gave us Scarface, which is pretty regular.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Hey, I haven’t read this book yet, but I was wondering if anyone could tell me how much if any sexual content there is in this book., because my 12 year old son wants to read it. I really appreciate it, thanks!

Reply to this: comment | thread

I believe there is some sexual content.  Check your local library to see if they own a copy so you can preview it first.  If they don’t have it, do an inter-library loan.  Or go to your local comic shop and flip through it.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Thanks, I think I’ll check at Barnes and Noble to see (the chairs there are very comfortable).

Reply to this: comment | thread